Turin 1
Elise Turin
Professor Melanie Zynel
English 1020
4 December 2012
A Proposed Necessity: Accessibility and Mobility
Public transportation is a vital part of any successful metropolis. Organized public transit
systems are critical to the economic and social quality of our nations citizens; transportation and
mobility independence are our privileges as Americans. Aside from being one of our privileges,
a public transportation system has the power to generate and support a strong and prosperous
economy. In order to encourage economic and social development in a “post-industrious” city
that is seeking new horizons, it is evident that Detroit’s aging public transportation infrastructure
is a growing problem that needs to be resolved. A reinvented bus transportation system in Detroit
would have the power to provide important connections to the suburbs, the state, and the
Midwest as well accessibility to other major cities across the nation. Detroit’s prosperity is
reliant on the development of a unified, well constructed public transportation system that will
enable and create opportunities across the city and it’s suburbs.
In order to fully understand the problem that I am proposing a restoration for, it is
important to evaluate how the city’s transportation system is in it’s current state. Similar to cities
such as Chicago and San Francisco, Detroit introduced a public transportation system in an effort
to connect Metro Detroit’s 1947 population of 3,219,256 citizens (with 1,849,568 in the city
limits compared to it’s current 713,777). The electric streetcar system was implemented and
successfully connected vital city roads and neighborhoods. But, in a city nicknamed for the
industry it was build upon, it became inevitable that the street car system would be replaced by
Turin 2
the birth of the Motor City’s highways that would encourage personal car usage. The city’s
major car industry encouraged the introduction of paved roads, Detroit’s Woodward Avenue was
the first in the nation. But, the leader of the car industry, General Motors, felt they might be
threatened by the then successful public transportation systems. The company sought corporate
power and made it their duty to tear up streetcar lines, in order to monopolize interstate
commerce (later buses created by General Motors would be introduced, in addition to the
company’s magnitude of personal vehicles). This was the end of Detroit’s most successful public
transportation system, leaving the city with a future of bus systems that would separate the city
and it’s suburbs. Detroit’s lack of potential funds and constant disputes over transportation would
keep the city’s transit system from reaching the success that it’s Midwest neighbors had.
Detroit’s growth has been restricted due to it’s problematic public transportation. In a city
where the city council has been criticized as being dysfunctional, it is incredibly important for
for urbanites and suburbanites, as well as government and business leaders, to put aside their
differences and recognize that creating quality transportation in the Motor City is an urgent
matter. Detroit’s economic depression has affected it’s ability to provide a sufficient tax base for
important city services, such as a successful transportation system, that cities such as New York
and Chicago are able to provide. Unlike other cities, Detroit lost 61,000 housing units and
180,000 citizens between 1980 and 1990. By the year 1990, 35 percent of the Detroit’s citizens
could not afford a car, and ten years later the city is still struggling with a per capita income of
$14,118 a child poverty percentage of 54, and 32 percent of families living below the federally
defined poverty level. It’s economic failures have left it with one of the lowest per capita transit
spending, limiting the city’s overall growth. Because of it’s inadequate funding, the city is left
with the DDOT (Detroit Department of Transportation) bus system that is known for it’s lagging
Turin 3
bus schedules, as well as frequent service changes due to budget cuts. The SMART (Suburban
Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation) system serves the suburbs and has also been
criticized for it’s untimeliness, and it’s confusing incoherence with DDOT bus times and
transfers. In addition to SMART and DDOT, downtown’s over-head rail, the Detroit People
Mover, has also proven itself invaluable and unavailing (it only filled less than 10 percent of it’s
seats in 2006). With the current revitalization of the city, it’s evident that Detroit is on the cusp
of of a rebirth. In order to enable a promising future the city requires greater funding that will
enable a new transportation system to strengthen connectivity to make Detroit the city it once
was. The city’s economic depression has been the problem for it’s transportation system, but
with the assist of a new tax system and increased fares, I am proposing a Southeast Michigan
Bus Transit (SEMBT) that will unify the suburbs and the city while using funds to promote
positive management, energy conservation, accessibility and safety.
DDOT is constantly criticized for untimeliness. Transportation Riders United gave
DDOT an overall grade of a D-, emphasizing that “riders cannot reliably get to work or school
on broken buses, broken management practices or broken promises.” Their frequent budget cuts
might be to blame for why DDOT employees tend to perform their jobs in isolation rather than
focusing on the larger picture of a unified public transit that would help adherence to schedules,
as well successfully transporting passengers to their destinations. Bus untimeliness (DDOT buses
have a 63% on-time rate) is often due to maintenance issues, which is why SEMBT will seek a
new approach to improve the efficiency of the maintenance procedures themselves while
pursuing strategies that would minimize service disruptions as much as possible. Transit systems
across America have used modern technology to their advantage, while introducing time
standards for maintenance procedures as well as the encouragement of electronic diagnostics and
Turin 4
pre-prepared parts kits that can quicken the maintenance process as a whole. Cash incentives
should also be proposed when employees meet the time requirements to help ensure timeliness.
Simple alterations such as the promotion of electronic-based procedures could significantly
maximize employees adherence to schedules.
In order to promote longevity of the city, it is important to minimize air pollutant
emissions and concentrations for the bus system of which I am proposing. Improvements in the
public transportation system would lead to ridership which would lead to a large reduction of
CO2 emissions. In 2009, Duke University published research claiming that, a typical passenger
car carrying one person gets 25 passenger miles per gallon, while a conventional bus at its
capacity of 70 (seated and standing) gets 163 passenger miles per gallon. The use of alternative
fuels should be encouraged, although green buses might not currently be in the proposed
SEMBT budget, it is required their addition is kept in mind for the future. The car industry is
currently testing out alternative powered personal vehicles that successfully run without the use
of diesel or gasoline, why not test these alternative sources on a booming public bus system? In
addition to proposing a future plan of alternative resources, it is important to require bicycle
accessibility on all buses as soon as possible. Although upgrading our fuel sources as well as
adding green buses could be costly it is important to recognize and remember their extremely
important, valuable long-term effects. In addition to eliminating emissions, a public
transportation rider can achieve an average annual savings of $8,500 by taking public transit
instead of driving, based on March 2009 gas prices and the unreserved parking rate. American
households [on average] spend 18% of their budget on transportation; the average European
Union household, which relies more on public transit, spends just 12%.
Turin 5
In order to promote ridership to all citizens, it is important to maximize accessibility to
people who might have disadvantaged mobility as well as senior citizens, and people who do not
have access to automobiles. It is important to provide continuous service across large portions of
the region, as well as direct access to airports, train stations and other ports that have the ability
to encourage state and nationwide travel. They city also lacks of child care centers that have the
potential to restrict parental guardians from career opportunities. Child care centers close to
major bus routes and transfer points as well as transit centers would have the ability to allow
equal opportunities to parental guardians.
In order to minimize emissions and reduce unnecessary costs it is highly important to
create routes that serve the city’s citizens well. In order to do this I feel it is necessary to produce
different daytime and nighttime transit maps, in which the proposed SEMBT could create more
comprehensive, concise and rapid nighttime services. In order to produce the different day and
night maps, the proposed SEMBT should collect data in which customer demand could decide
which routes should exist. Then, routes that see zero usage during the nighttime could be
eliminated, while separate new routes could keep those of which saw activity running for 24hours. But, because the current DDOT transportation is criticized for not informing riders of
changed routes, it is highly important to produce and publicize education for riders to eliminate
confusion and provide knowledge of the new routes. In addition to providing literature about the
altered routes, Detroit could mimic cities such as Hong Kong and Chicago, in which night routes
are simply expressed by the prefix “N.”
As much as I wish I could provide first hand knowledge of Detroit’s current problematic
public transportation, it’s been my parent’s request that I wait until I reach a greater point of
familiarity with the city before I experience the bus system. In addition to ill-management and
Turin 6
untimeliness, the safety of the future SEMBT system needs to be a main priority. In November
2011, DDOT bus drivers went on strike when a driver was beaten by teenagers on Rosa Parks
Boulevard. It took police thirty minutes to reach the bus. Therefore, I am proposing standard
safety devices to be used on each bus. Although I can’t propose a plan for the police force, a
simple safety device in which each bus “checks-in” with a police force member, would help
assure timeliness of police arrival in unsafe situations. Because I previously mentioned the
positive consequences of the usage of night routes, it is important to secure safety in areas of the
city and routes in which stops have been eliminated, or the rare long walk. I am also proposing
the introduction of safety buttons at these stops. Similar to the emergency blue safety light
telephones at Wayne State University, which scatter areas of traffic in order to assure safety on
campus at night. Because of cost purposes, these emergency telephones will be used an
extremely strategic locations. But, in order to ensure ridership it is important to keep safety a
high concern.
Although my proposed SEMBT plan is obviously costly it is important that the
improvements are cost-effective, and it is important to remember their long term benefits for the
city. Therefore, it is highly important that a new transportation authority creatively explores
ways to fund the proposed SEMBT project. It is important to introduce sales tax as a revenue
source for the proposed system. Seattle’s public transit is funded by 1.3 percent of sales tax,
which explains it’s ranking as number nine in a U.S. News article, “10 Best Cities for Public
Transportation.” Detroit is a minority of cities that does not fund public transportation with sales
tax, along with Portland’s transit system in which a payroll tax is implemented (putting it at
number five in the U.S News article). In addition to a sales tax, I believe that it is important to
explore the possible funding that could be generated from gas taxes, vehicle registration as well
Turin 7
as alcohol and tobacco taxes. One would argue the importance of a fare increase, but because of
the transit system’s current state of unreliability and the poverty level of Detroit transit riders,
this should be considered as a viable option in the future. Because my proposal contains a
unification of SMART and DDOT, I would make sure that the new transit system would contain
coordinated fares between the suburbs and the inner-city, so that regional passes and inter-system
transfers would not require the additional payments that they currently do.
I moved to the Motor City after spending nearly four years in Seoul, South Korea, a city
that inspired my studies of Detroit’s transportation infrastructure. Even as a foreigner who lacked
any knowledge of the country’s language, the bus and subway system of the city are incredibly
comprehendible and accessible. The metro-Seoul area’s modes of transportation (subway and
bus) are easily paid for by one card, the T-Money card. In this city, I became aware of the
difference technology can make for any transportation system. I was constantly connected with
phone applications that provided constant updates of exact bus locations. The use of technology
is incredibly important to update the Motor City’s transportation system. Regional transportation
cards and phone applications should be explored for future SEMBT budgets, in order to make
Detroit the city it once was.
The SEMBT transportation system would be highly efficient in reducing distance and
time spent traveling as well as encouraging employment retention, attraction and expansion to
Southeast Michigan as a whole. It is incredibly important that the city evaluates our
transportation with the importance that it should be regarded with. In order to reach the common
goal of revitalizing Detroit, Southeast Michigan should reunite and come together to encourage
the potential of our public transportation system.